Same reason they constantly describe Epstein victims with the oxymoronic term "underage women."

Why do reporters nearly always defend these men with their word choices?

Rape culture.

Rapists protecting rapists.

Why do reporters nearly always defend these men with their word choices?

Same reason they don't talk about climate change during periods of record heat, or mega wildfire's, many people tune out

If the say rape, the half of the country who voted for Trump immediately tune out. They cannot abide the cognitive dissonance. The rest of us already know the scale of the problem within the GOP. Journalists have to censor the word at this point so it fits within the overton window.

I’m gonna be devils advocate, and agree with them not using rape in their title wording. Instead it should have highlighted that he coerced and groomed her. I say this because it more accurately describes the situation, per the article this was the purpose of their meetings rather than him forcing himself upon her. It also highlights the danger kids are exposed to on platforms like Roblox and social media

When it comes to reporting, they always want to go with what is verifiable, and accurate. That is why they always use phrasing like "alleged", "have sex".

The legal definition of "rape" varies quite wildly from region to region, and many things the average person would obviously consider rape, may not be in the legal definition, opening up news media and/or the reporter directly to potential legal trouble. For instance in some areas, "rape" requires vaginal penetration by a penis... So legally, a man cannot be "raped". So a report that a woman raped a man there, would technically be inaccurate and potentially defamatory.

It's much easier to just use generic terms and allegations when reporting, especially if it's not just a local media organization where differing laws for other regions are a factor. Even in situations where the laws aren't likely to be different... sex with a middle schooler is almost surely statutory rape regardless of the area. But standardizing around general statements is the best option to avoid legal issues, even if those aren't likely to be successful, they cost money to defend.

That’s cause GOP stands for Gathering of Pedophiles.

I sent a message through their contact page as well. Thank you. I hope they respond appropriately.

I’m surprised they allowed this to be published as is considering the source.

They changed it to 'allegedly sexually abusing.'

Still not a drag queen

Yeah, WTF?

At least they didn’t go with the newest “ugh” term - “underage woman”. If she’s underage, she’s not a woman

Yeah, change the title @Sunflier@lemmy.world that's wrong. The article says "allegedly sexually abusing a middle schooler in a classroom".

Edit: just saw that was the original article title. Utter crap on the part of lgbtqnation, but i think you also should've done better.

They always do that!!! It's got to be some legal thing like it's alleged and not proven to be rape?

I don't know.

I'm sorry you had to find out this way, but yes, you were an extremely unfuckable kid. I hacked into their mailing lists, meeting minutes, and records, and you would not believe how much time they spent talking about you. One of them said he was feeling very desperate once, and had an opportunity with you, but before he could go through with it he realized he was better than this and it turned his life around and fixed his low self-esteem. The meeting minutes made a point of highlighting that when he was discussing his rock-bottom moment, that he may stoop so low as to assaulting you, the assembled people audibly said "eww" and gasped. When he said he couldn't bring himself to do it, everyone applauded.

Sorry champ. But the good news is you grew out of it, like that classic kid's story, The Unfuckable Duckling!

Were all my friends whose families weren't religious just unfuckable kids?

First, in my anecdotal knowledge, religious is more likely than non-religious. Second, they just don't talk about it.

Or a priest.

You're a billion too short, Skippy.

Dems are complicit controlled opposition

Pritt was initially elected to the state House as a Democrat in 2022 but changed his political affiliation to Republican the year after. Republican Party chair Elgine McArdle said in a statement that Pritt had realized that the “Democratic Party of today is not the Democratic Party that our parents grew up with.”

So much to unpack here. Originally a Dem, but switched to Rep without realizing how far they are from the Republican party "our parents grew up with"? Or perhaps his pedophilia and instinct to project onto others made him realize the Republicans are a better fit for him?

I'd gladly do so if you add an expressed permission in the rules to guaruntee that some other mod in the future doesn't bjtch about making that sort of change (especially if this happens again to another article down the road). Add text to rule 1. Like add a rule 1a that says something like:

The original poster may update their Lemmy post's titles to match an updated article title ONLY IF the origional source has updated the article's title subsequent to the original posting on Lemmy.

Make that change, and I'll happily update it. I just want to shield myself and future posters from arbitrary and capricious moderators.